Actually, we probably don't have an argument. I was trying some squid tactics by throwing some sticks at the cages. Honestly, I think 15 to 20 bucks an hour is probably about right for the job skill required, but half the guys who wear white shirts and a tie and are in the 'knowledge' business have no business making as much as nurses, but they do. And I can pretty well guarantee that neither GM nor Ford will be allowed to go under. The govt bailed Chrysler out TWICE. I don't believe there is any sense of urgency at GM, for that reason. Those guys on the assembly line make way more than they should because, years ago, GM caved to every demand to keep the assembly lines going because they knew they could sell any piece of crap they made. By now, their bad habits are ingrained in both Union and Management. Harley came pretty close to the edge themselves, but they have a product that has so far found favor with enough Americans that we are willing to pay way more than they cost to make. Sort of like a two wheeled SUV. The markup on SUVs is enormous, and the auto industry in this country has become addicted to the easy money to be made by selling them. That's all well and good, until tastes change. Then, you better have used all that cash you have piled up to develop what the market now demands. I don't think GM or anyone in management at Ford has given a moments thought to what they will do next. for a very long time. Next quarters results are about as far ahead as they look. Does anyone think that the folks at Harley have given much thought to what the future might look like? I doubt it. The typical GM or Ford Executive makes four or five times as much as a Toyota or Honda executive, and has done damn little to earn it. When they finally go over a cliff, it will be all the Unions fault. THAT's what I find annoying.

The recent case of the Home Depot guy who did a bad job and walked with 200-million highlights the problems that exist between management and the workers who actually assemble the product. Who's more important to the company in the end? The argument goes either way, but you still need both parties in at work on Monday morning. A fair wage for a job well done is the ideal of collective bargaining, isn't it? I think your take on Detroit is right. Management would cave to union demands to keep the metal rollng out of the door, and it became a bad habit for both sides. But Chrysler was not bailed out by the government. It was given a loan guaranteed by the government. That's not the same thing. The loans had to be -- and were -- paid back. Still, as you say, the domestic auto industry has been fixated on short-term results. Toyota has a 100-year plan. Addressing your comment about SUVs... it has to be said that the trend was market driven. Consumers wanted them, and the companies made 'em. if the profit margin was larger, well, who can blame the auto companies for taking their money.

We use cookies to improve your experience on this website and so that ads you see online can be tailored to your online browsing interests.
We use data about you for a number of purposes explained in the links below. By continuing to browse our site you agree to our use of data and cookies.
Tell me more |
Cookie Preferences

We use cookies to improve your experience on this website and so that ads you see online can be tailored to your online browsing interests. We use data about you for a number of purposes explained in the links below. By continuing to browse our site you agree to our use of data and cookies.Tell me more | Cookie Preferences